Avodah Mailing List

Volume 04 : Number 437

Tuesday, March 14 2000

• Chazalic sea faring?, Ayin tachas ayin
• Re: birkhat ha-gomeil
• birkhat ha-gomeil-humor alert
• Re: Malbusham
• Re: Malbusham
• humorous site
• Re: humorous site
• RE: Yisachar-Zevulin
• Holocaust and the RW
• Re[2]: Proper Jewish Fashion
• Re: Chazeres vs. Maror
• Re: Chazalic sea faring?, Ayin tachas ayin
• Re: holocaust
• loshon hamrugal?
• Re: Nissan
• Re: birkhat ha-gomeil
• Re: Re[2]: Proper Jewish Fashion
• Re: Nissan
• Wingers alert
• Re[2]: birkhat ha-gomeil
• Re[2]: Yisachar-Zevulin
• Re: Chazalic sea faring?, Ayin tachas ayin
• Re: Avodah V4 #436

there has been some discussion of the pishat vs dirash understanding
of ayin tachas ayin. On this matter I would commend to the readership
a quite modern "perush",  prof  N. Sarna's book  on biresihis. Titled
"Genesis" (and available in many local jewish book stores) it is a work
by an academic (i think niftar), aimed at a popular and not necessarily
a jewish audience. It folds in insight from the contemporaneous near
eastern cultural matrix, archeological finds etc. i.e. about as pishuto
shel miqroh and non-midrashic as you might expect from such a source.
 However, I seem to recall that he goes through a rather lengthy and
ultimately convincing series of arguments (some noted by chazal, some
not) to the effect that ayin tachas ayin equals cash really was the pishuto
shel miroh back then.  Go figure. BTW there are many nuggets in this
book (and his companion volume "Exodus") and I would recommend these
works to you pishuto fans out there. he is generally careful not to offend
any religious sensibilities in these books. No biblical criticism of
whatever altitude - but here and there one may detect a whiff of an attitude
or factoid that wouldn't play-in-ponovitch.    Of course the entire academic
approach, that much may be learned by cross cultural studies, is not
much in favor in traditional circles which tend to view all jewish history,
but especially the mysterious time of the ovos, as refracted through
the singular spiritual experience of the jewish people.  goyim, aside
form serving as props, might as well not be there.  

On another matter, my learned friend DDG in the course of his correspondence
on hagomeil, reaching, I suppose, for illustration of the inherent dangers
of any travel in ancient times as compared to our own, averred that 
<.. In the time of Chazal,  people who crossed the ocean literally did
not know where they were>  
This is quite curious.   Just what oceans were people supposed to have
crossed back then?  

Mechy Frankel               W: (703) 588-7424
frankemj@acq.osd.mil        H: (301) 593-3949
michael.frankel@dtra.mil 
Michael Frankel
mechyfrankel@zdnetonebox.com - email
(202) 777-2641 ext. 1299 - voicemail/fax



___________________________________________________________________
To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax,
all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com

On Tue, Mar 14, 2000 at 04:09:29PM -0500, David Glasner wrote:
: The point is you are positing a circumstance (flying in an airplane)
: or sailing on a ship and then hypothesizing about what would 
: happen if the vehicle in which you are being transported were to
: disappear.

Or, for that matter, sitting on the 42nd floor of an office building. Even
being on the second floor of a house wouldn't be too healthy.

(Below, "him" is the Aruch haShulchan [AH].)
: I'm sorry, but I don't think that you are reading him in context.  He
: speaks about a continuum from routine daily life, which he writes
: is also, in some metaphysical sense, miraculous, ("v'al nisekha
: she-b'khol yom imanu v'al v'niphl'otekha v'tovotekha she-b'khol
: eit, erev va'boker v'tzohoraim")

I thought we established that the clause "erev vavoker vitzohorayim" described
the times of hoda'ah -- not the times of miraculous.

BTW, this gets us back to the question of whether nature and miracle are
different in kind. You say that the AH sees it as a continuum. This merely
shifts the question to asking where on the continuum does one place the
shiur for benching gomel.

: ha-gomeil is said in recognition of events in which one is subject
: to more than the routine daily danger to which one is routinely 
: exposed even though one survived the danger with no departure
: from derekh ha-teva.  A departure from derekh ha-teva 
: would require a brakha of al ha-nissim.

Again, a second shiur -- how far along the continuum is considered outside
"derech hateva"?

: events along this continuum may change depending on the
: frequency with which they occur and other surrounding 
: circumstances that indicate the level of danger to which one
: was exposed.  V'ayein sham.

This defines the problem in specific terms, but does little to answer it.

Why does routine airplane flight, which has a smaller percentage of casualties
per traveler than does car travel, and is reasonably common, require gomeil?
And why is sea travel further along the continuum than flying across the
US (to pick a large land mass frequently spanned)?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger (973) 916-0287          MMG"H for 14-Mar-00: Shelishi, Vayikra
micha@aishdas.org                                         A"H 
http://www.aishdas.org                                    Rosh-Hashanah 9a
For a mitzvah is a lamp, and the Torah its light.         

> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 16:09:29 -0500
> From: "David Glasner" <dglasner@ftc.gov>
> Subject: Re: birkhat ha-gomeil

<< See for example, his discussion of which sorts of spontaneously
generated lice one is permitted to kill on the Sabbath (sorry, I don't
remember the siman number off the top of my head.) >>

	I'd keep that particular siman off the top of MY head <g>

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

In a message dated 3/14/00 3:14:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
mosherudner@hotmail.com writes:

> "The common expression that the Israelites did not change their "names, 
>  language and clothing" is not found in any Midrashic source."
>  
As I said look in the Michlol he has  Medrosh source forn not changing 
clothing.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

RM Rudner wrote:

>>R' Kaplan in "The Handbook of Jewish Thought" Vol. I 4:35 footnote 95 
writes... "The common expression that the Israelites did not change their 
"names, language and clothing" is not found in any Midrashic source.">>

He was echoing Buber's footnote to the midrash.  However, RMM Kasher in his 
Torah Sheleimah brings the midrash down from manuscript.  In the back of one of 
the early parshios in Shemos he has an essay on this midrash.

Gil Student
pareto_soup@yahoo.com

I liked this site, it has Purim lessons for all of us - and part of the site 
is not even Bitul Zman!!!


http://www.yucs.org/~frazers/link.cgi


;-I

ehsoM
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

In a message dated 3/14/00 5:51:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
mosherudner@hotmail.com writes:

> ehsoM

There are different opinions how Hipuch in Oisyos work (i.e. Nun Hafucha) :-)

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

> -----Original Message-----
	On Tuesday, March 14, 2000 2:43 PM Carl M. Sherer wrote:
> Sent:	Tuesday, March 14, 2000 2:43 PM
> To:	Markowitz, Chaim; avodah@aishdas.org; 'micha@aishdas.org'
> Subject:	Re: Yisachar-Zevulin
> 
> On 14 Mar 00, at 14:25, Markowitz, Chaim wrote:
>  
> > Let me rephrase my question. Gershon Dubin mentioned that Rabbi Y.
> Reisman
> > cited sources that one does become a
> > : talmid chochom from being a Zvulun. You made the claim that the reason
> > that this is so is due to the fact that he appreciates what learning is
> > about and therefore will learn with greater intensity. My point is that
> I
> > don't see how this appreciation is intrinsically tied to being a
> Zevulun.
> > You could be a pauper and still have a high appreciation for learning. 
> 
> Yes, but not in the same way as one who puts out his own hard-
> earned cash to support someone learning, thereby gaining an 
> appreciation for the material struggles that someone who is a 
> Yissochor must face.
> 
	M'heichah Teisei to say this? Do you mean to tell me you really
believe a Zevulun has a higher appreciation for learning than a regular
person simply because he shares some of  his money with a Yissachar? Take a
case of a multi billionaire who gives half his money to a Yissachar-he is
not financially lacking so according to you he should not have a higher
appreciation of learning than a non Zevulun. 
> I
> > don't think that it is connected to whether you are a Zevulun or not.
> 
> If you're not a Zevulun it's more abstract.
> 
	What does that mean?

> > Furthermore, how about the Zevulun who doesn't learn? How does he become
> a
> > Talmid Chacham.
> 
> I think the idea is that by seeing how much the Yissochor 
> struggles to be able to learn, the Zevulun will be inspired to want to 
> learn also, at least to the extent of having a seder kavua.
> 
	Fine but why do you say his appreciation for learning is higher than
a non Zevulun.

A poster criticized the RW for using the term Churban Europe instead of 
Holocaust.
I was unaware that Dr. Norman Lamm was a right winger. In his book "Faith and 
doubt" page 76 he refers to the Holocaust as "Hurban Eiropa".

I guess R. Lamm finally saw the light! : - )

Toby Rubinson

Question: wouldnt' wearing a kipa be yotzei the requirnment of uniqueness, and 
therfore no other clothing changes are required.

Lich'ora, if standing out from a crowd is the criteria,doesn't a kipa do the 
trick?

If there is some other agenda beside avodiing assimilation, then what is it?  do
we need to davka have every article of clothing unique?

richard_wolpoe@ibi.com

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

See the Darkei Tshuva Al Asar Y"D 178 Ois 4, he brings from Shut Tuv Tam 
Vodas (Kamo 188) that Jews are obligated to be unique in their clothing, he 
also brings from Shut Imrei Eish (Y"D 55) that in the polish Jewry clothing 
style there is "Mishum Yehudis" etc. etc. bottom line w/o going into the 
actual Halacha there is "heiligeit" (holiness) in keeping the style of garb.

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Please clarify: does this mean to imply that ground horseraddish IS defined as 
chazeres or is that you merely put it in the chazeres slot?

Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Chazeres vs. Maror 

FWIW my shver's minhag (which I have adopted) is to use the 
"maror" (consisting of chunks of horseradish) for Korech, and to 
use ground horseradish (chazeres) for maror.

-- Carl

In a message dated 3/14/00 3:31:59 PM US Central Standard Time, 
mechyfrankel@zdnetonebox.com writes:

<< On another matter, my learned friend DDG in the course of his 
correspondence
 on hagomeil, reaching, I suppose, for illustration of the inherent dangers
 of any travel in ancient times as compared to our own, averred that 
 <.. In the time of Chazal,  people who crossed the ocean literally did
 not know where they were>  
 This is quite curious.   Just what oceans were people supposed to have
 crossed back then?  
  >>

Perhaps he meant "sea" instead of "ocean," sea being a general term. If he 
wanted to be specific, he'd have said the Specific Ocean. 

David Finch

--- Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com> wrote:
  

>  
>  I fail to see why the term adopted by the 
> Holocaust industry has more
> feeling attached to it  than one recommended by a
> godol hador. You're so
> used to hearing the word that you cannot entertain
> an alternative, or
> else you reject the term Churban ipso facto it is
> used in the (hold nose)
> RW. 

>  
> I refuse to accept the implication that using a term
> other than
> "Holocaust" belittles anyone. 

>  
> The survivors don't give a hoot what you  call it.
> The experience is so
> beyond anyone's comprehension who wasn't actually
> there that they despair
> of describing it. Holocaust or Shoa or  Churban. 

> Nobody ever implied less than full respect for any
> survivor. I just
> simply do not  follow your logic and I believe you
> are making a mountain
> out of less than a molehill

With all the Purim Torah floating around, (which I
enjoyed reading, especially Eli Clark's) I hesitate to
respond and break the mood and I hate to belabor the
point. Never-the-less, here is my response:

 I never intended it to go this far. Maybe it is a
molehill. My only intent was to mention a pet peeve of
mine.  It DOES bother me when I hear a rejection of
the term most commonly used to describe the Holocaust.
The implication to me is that it's a rejection of all
survivors that are not frum.  I don't know if it is
necessarily intended that way but that is the way I
hear it. Why not just call it Holocaust?  What is to
be lost?

It is one thing to be precise.  But when you say
Holocaust, everyone knows what you mean.  You don't
have to be any more precise than that. So to say that
Churban Europe is more precise sounds disingenuous to
me. Also, calling it the Holocaust does not detract
from any of the other great tragedies of Jewish
history.  It is simply the label that has been affixed
to the greatest tragedy of the 20th century, one which
has effected us all. 

I don't know that I can be any clearer than that.

One more thing. I do not hate the Right. I am offended
by the very notion. I know that I am always
critisizing them but it is only because I care about
what they think, and about what they do because of
their great contributions and influence in the Torah
world. All I am after is Yashrus. Furthermore, to many
people in my community I am a RWer. Of course I am,
also, a LWer to many others. I don't identify myself
as either.  

Eye of the beholder.

I believe I am somewhere in the middle.

HM




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

Excuse my abyssmal ignorance, but what is a loshon hamrugal?  

KT,
Shlomo Godick

In a message dated 3/14/00 2:02:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, Yzkd@aol.com 
writes:

<< >  
 The idea itself in other form is found in Medrosh, the particular Loshon was 
 found also in a Medrosh.
 
 Kol Tuv
 
 Yitzchok Zirkind >>
Yes but as I understand it, not in a commonly found one. My question was - 
when did it become popularized?

Kol tuv,
joel Rich

In a message dated 3/14/00 4:31:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, dglasner@ftc.gov 
writes:

<< 
 You mean aside from Rabbi Mazon?  Based on the
 response I have received on and off line, I suspect 
 that I may be a da'at yahid.  Unfortunately, I can't rely 
 on my usual ace in the hole on this one.
 
 David Glasner
 dglasner@ftc.gov
 
  >>
See R' Bleich's contemporary halachik problems vol III for a more complete 
discussion 

Kol Tuv,
Joel Rich

In a message dated 3/14/00 6:12:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
richard_wolpoe@ibi.com writes:

> Question: wouldnt' wearing a kipa be yotzei the requirnment of uniqueness, 
and 
>  therfore no other clothing changes are required.

For discussion on the Chukois Hagoyim aspect see Encyclopedia Talmudis Vol. 
17 page 307.

>  
>  Lich'ora, if standing out from a crowd is the criteria,doesn't a kipa do 
the  trick?

Yes that is the Shita of the MaHaRIK. (and see ET Hanal).

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

In a message dated 3/14/00 7:18:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Joelirich@aol.com writes:

> My question was - 
>  when did it become popularized?

Dunno, maybe someone with a CD could check it out, and/or look up the Torah 
Shleimoh previously mentioned, (I don't own one).

Kol Tuv

Yitzchok Zirkind

Dear HM

If being in the middle means you can play center, too, then the Blackhawks may 
make you into an entire line!

Richard_wolpoe@ibi.com

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
 Furthermore, to many people in my community I am a 
RWer. Of course I am, also, a LWer to many others. I 
don't identify myself as either.  

Eye of the beholder.

I believe I am somewhere in the middle.

HM

Perhaps the rhetoric is bad, but not necessary the point.

My point is that elveators are irrelevant, so were chariots gamla parchas, boros
she'ein bo mayim, and other "dnagers" of both the modern and ancient world>

Question: was Essther chayeves to bench gomeil when she intrdued upon 
achasveirosh after he 3 day fast?  Was her life in danger?  Did she mee the 
criteria for gomeil benching?

Traversing seas and deserts fits into the gemoros categorizations, trvaersing 
I-95 does not.

klal uprat?

What is the exact loshon of the gemoro... 

Richard_wolpoe@ibi.com




______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________


Richard Wolpoe replied:

<<<
And how about if an elevator were to collapse in a sky-scraper? 
>>>

Ein hakhi nami.  I think that is the reductio ad absurdum of the 
svara you cited

<<<
As far as I can tell the velocity is not the issue; the modality is. 
>>>

The point is you are positing a circumstance (flying in an airplane) 
or sailing on a ship and then hypothesizing about what would 
happen if the vehicle in which you are being transported were to 
disappear.  There are circumstances in which you get the same 
result whether you are in a car or an airplane or an elevator 
when you work through the thought experiment.  But the 
practice of reciting the birkhat ha-gomeil doesn't seem to 
follow the results of the thought experiment.


David Glasner
dglasner@ftc.gov

Old thread I believe.  IIRC R. Moshe said no, others disagreed

Richard_wolpoe@ibi.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________

Further question - does being in a Y/Z relationship require that the 
Z support a specific talmid chacham, or can it be attained by 
supporting Yeshivos generally? From what has been written over 
the last day or so, I suspect the former, in which case it is 
surprising that most Yeshivos do not attempt to formalize the 
relationship.

-- Carl

On this matter I would commend to the readership a quite modern "perush",  prof 
N. Sarna's book  on biresihis. <snip>
 I seem to recall that he goes through a rather lengthy and
ultimately convincing series of arguments (some noted by chazal, some 
not) to the effect that ayin tachas ayin equals cash really was the 
pishuto shel miroh back then.  Go figure.   

Mechy<<

Yep that is my understanding that PESHAT is not always literal...

1) literal meaning - take out an eye.  (this might be important on the spiritual
level as per an ealier post) 

2) peshat - often can be  based upon an idiomatic meaning - in this case a legal
idiom - meaning fair or just compensation (this is my old posting from way back)

3) medrash halacha - 5 forms of compensation, etc.

Note that peshat is close to literal, but allows for idiom and some poetic 
license.  Most drush moves off the simple meaning, but much drush - typically 
the medrash halacha - is closer to peshat, or at least close to the text

How about ein mikro yotsaei midei peshuto?

There is probably a loto of Toah on this, the TAZ in YD IIRC says in effect that
no medrash halachah can out-and-out contradict peshat - stecth beyodn pesaht - 
yes but contradict it  no.

And peshat is NOT always literal, that should be a piece of cake to understand, 
or do I have to draw you a picture!

Richard_Wolpoe@ibi.com

In a message dated 3/14/00 4:19:36 PM Central Standard Time, 
owner-avodah@aishdas.org writes:

<< << Subject: Re: RW, was re: Avodah V4 #431
 > :  That was street hockey. My record in ice hockey was not as stellar. So I
 > :  went into learning instead. >>
 > 
 > : So, now it's a P'shot, and, a goal? Whoops, sorry for the humor.
 > 
 > Okay, I'm confused on two points.
 > 
 > First, is that "p'shot" with a kamatz katan or a cholam?
 
 Depends where you come from. If you're from Chicago, it's with a 
 patach :-)  >>

If you're in New York it's chalom.

*********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]